Low-paid illegal work force has little impact on prices

The Seattle Times ^ | September 19, 2006 | Drew DeSilver

[ruination]

More than 7 million illegal immigrants work in the United States. They build houses, pick crops, slaughter cattle, stitch clothes, mow lawns, clean hotel rooms, cook restaurant meals and wash the dishes that come back.

You might assume that the plentiful supply of low-wage illegal workers would translate into significantly lower prices for the goods and services they produce. In fact, their impact on consumer prices — call it the "illegal-worker discount" — is surprisingly small.

[raybbr]

If the supply of illegal workers were cut off, wages for those low-skilled jobs presumably would have to rise enough to attract legal workers into them. If, hypothetically, wage levels rose by a third, that would either add around $1,600 to the cost of the typical house or shave half a percentage point off the builder's 12 percent average profit margin.

Then why are they allowed to come?

[raybbr]

Related

• State struggles to catch work-site abuses
• Part 1 | Home-building boom relies on illegal workers
• Part 3 | Low-paid illegal work force has little impact on prices

[raybbr]

Let me try this again.

Related:

Get-tough policy on employers has had limited effect

Part 1 | Home-building boom relies on illegal workers

[raybbr]

Please delete No. 3. Links are bad.

[FarmerW]

Saying we should allow illegal immigration to continue is the same as saying we should allow slavery to keep the price of cotton down.

All the "reforms" and "improvements" libs want for illegals are just building a better slave ship.

[ruination]

Then why are they allowed to come?

Probably because the employers a) want to keep that extra sliver of wages for themselves, and b) prefer workers that don't require benefits and that won't complain if they're mistreated.

[Froufrou]

It's more sinister than that. Liberals want to keep people stupid and on welfare. It's their voting base.

[raybbr]

Probably because the employers a) want to keep that extra sliver of wages for themselves, and b) prefer workers that don't require benefits and that won't complain if they're mistreated.

That might be from the economic perspective. It's the political perspective that I don't understand. I mean, I understand why Bush has allowed this to happen. He thinks he has a mandate to create a "new America".

We are now one of the largest Spanish-speaking nations in the world. We're a major source of Latin music, journalism and culture.

Just go to Miami, or San Antonio, Los Angeles, Chicago or West New York, New Jersey ... and close your eyes and listen. You could just as easily be in Santo Domingo or Santiago, or San Miguel de Allende.

For years our nation has debated this change -- some have praised it and others have resented it. By nominating me, my party has made a choice to welcome the new America.

As I speak, we are celebrating the success of democracy in Mexico.

George Bush from a campaign speech in Miami, August 2000.

You can read the speech here.

Here is an excerpt of a good critique of that speech:

In equating our intimate historic bonds to our mother country and to Canada with our ties to Mexico, W. shows a staggering ignorance of the civilizational facts of life. The reason we are so close to Britain and Canada is that we share with them a common historical culture, language, literature, and legal system, as well as similar standards of behavior, expectations of public officials, and so on. My Bush Epiphany By Lawrence Auster

Click the Pic!!!!

The Path to National Suicide by Lawrence Auster (1990)

An essay on multi-culturalism and immigration.

How can we account for this remarkable silence? The answer, as I will try to show, is that when the Immigration Reform Act of 1965 was being considered in Congress, the demographic impact of the bill was misunderstood and downplayed by its sponsors. As a result, the subject of population change was never seriously examined. The lawmakers’ stated intention was that the Act should not radically transform America’s ethnic character; indeed, it was taken for granted by liberals such as Robert Kennedy that it was in the nation’s interest to avoid such a change. But the dramatic ethnic transformation that has actually occurred as a result of the 1965 Act has insensibly led to acceptance of that transformation in the form of a new, multicultural vision of American society. Dominating the media and the schools, ritualistically echoed by every politician, enforced in every public institution, this orthodoxy now forbids public criticism of the new path the country has taken. “We are a nation of immigrants,” we tell ourselves— and the subject is closed. The consequences of this code of silence are bizarre. One can listen to statesmen and philosophers agonize over the multitudinous causes of our decline, and not hear a single word about the massive immigration from the Third World and the resulting social divisions. Opponents of population growth, whose crusade began in the 1960s out of a concern about the growth rate among resident Americans and its effects on the environment and the quality of life, now studiously ignore the question of immigration, which accounts for fully half of our population growth.

This curious inhibition stems, of course, from a paralyzing fear of the charge of “racism.” The very manner in which the issue is framed—as a matter of equal rights and the blessings of diversity on one side, versus “racism” on the other—tends to cut off all rational discourse on the subject. One can only wonder what would happen if the proponents of open immigration allowed the issue to be discussed, not as a moralistic dichotomy, but in terms of its real consequences. Instead of saying: “We believe in the equal and unlimited right of all people to immigrate to the U.S. and enrich our land with their diversity,” what if they said: “We believe in an immigration policy which must result in a staggering increase in our population, a revolution in our culture and way of life, and the gradual submergence of our current population by Hispanic and Caribbean and Asian peoples.” Such frankness would open up an honest debate between those who favor a radical change in America’s ethnic and cultural identity and those who think this nation should preserve its way of life and its predominant, European-American character. That is the actual choice—as distinct from the theoretical choice between “equality” and “racism”—that our nation faces. But the tyranny of silence has prevented the American people from freely making that choice.

[mewzilla]

Low-paid illegal work force has little impact on prices

Hmmmm. Well, they do on wages....

Real World Proof That Illegal (Aliens)/Immigrants Depress Wages For American Workers

[FarmerW]

I agree the real reason for libs supporting illegals is to maintain a voting block.

What grinds my wires, is the digusting idea libs use to justify that illegals are better off here, as a rightless, oppressed, criminal class of people then back in their home country or living here under a legal reformed immigration policy.

I can hear the Scarlet O'hara figure telling people, "My darkies are much better off on my lettuce farm then they were back home. My Pappa promises them a shack to live in and basic food. That country they came from was nasty, they'd be living like savages there. If my Pappa didn't keep them, the price off lettuce would soar and all the vegetarians in Berkeley would be paying dearly. Barely enough to buy new Birkenstocks."

[DustyMoment]

Ya think??

[Dane]

Very interesting, the far left and far right have one central theme, they hate and want to control private business.

The far left as basically as pointed out by this article hate that businesses make a profit and prosper, the far right hates those same businesses because of the people they employ in creating wealth.

Both sides are control freaks when it comes to wealth creating business.

[ruination]

And the centrists like illegals? Hmmm.

[Dane]

And the centrists like illegals? Hmmm

Actually they do, but like is not the correct word, it's more like accepts their contribution to the economy.

Nearly two of every three Colorado voters think illegal immigrants should be allowed to become U.S. citizens if they pay taxes, learn English and meet other requirements, according to a new Rocky Mountain News/CBS 4 poll. Only 15 percent of those polled favor mass deportations. "People want to be tough but fair," said pollster Lori Weigel. "It's like many issues. You tend to hear from extremes on both ends. Clearly, this data indicate that there's a silent majority that is supportive of a more middle-ground approach."

[RFT1]

You really have no clue, do you, the sheer lack of logic in your posts really makes it great for the pro law enforcement side of the debate.

So here is an example using your "logic". If a business can ignore workplace rules on who they can hire, is it ok if they sell ILLEGAL drugs as well?Is it ok if they sell liqour to those under 21? Are these other laws also against "freedom"?

[Dane]

If a business can ignore workplace rules on who they can hire, is it ok if they sell ILLEGAL drugs as well?Is it ok if they sell liqour to those under 21? Are these other laws also against "freedom"?

So your arguement is that selling liquor to minors and the selling of illegal drugs is the moral equivalent to building shelter or growing and processing food.

Gee, I didn't know toking on a bong is the same as help building a house.

Who has the silly arguement now.

[capitalist229]

According to a recurring FR conspiracy theory, illegals are here for a reason.

Their voting bloc will usher in the North American Union. Its purpose is to put us in a better position to compete with Asia.

All of that cheap Mexican labor and plentiful Canadian natural resources, dontcha know. The Chinese know it, and are buying up Canada one company at a time.

It's the next big thing, low hanging fruit, too tempting a target for a growing 'empire' to ignore.

And splits the Republican party in two.

BUMP

[dennisw]

bttt

[wolfcreek]

If they're a 'silent' majority then, I guess their voices or votes won't be counted.


I've been in or around the construction business for more than 30 yrs. People who employee illegals might be making out well on their profit margin but, the product is crap. Not only are they using 'un-skilled workers' but they are using the cheapest materials and cutting corners in every phase of development. In other words, they're screwing you and me.